Large shipping vessels,are they really efficient ? EPA Hypocrisy

[Laurentiu]

Originally Posted by NachtRitter

I don't believe that is the case "in general" anymore... At least in the US, I don't believe Amtrak does the "direct dumping" anymore, and I think newer trains in the "more developed" parts of the world also have retention tanks.

However, I can't speak for every location / country...

True but think about it...how many people do you think travel by train in USA/EU compared to India lets say..I don't have any data but I could bet India is 2x more then those 2 combined

Originally Posted by Clev

Yeah, it's a bit of a misleading (and sensational) headline. Shipping vessels are fuel efficient for the load they carry. And since the EPA is creating a 'reduced emissions zone' around the US, where ships will need to clean themselves up to continue to deliver to the US, I fail to see the 'EPA hypocrisy.'

But hey, it got me to click on the thread, so I guess mission accomplished.

Unfortunately air/water do not kindly comply to being "zoned". I would say creating a reduced emissions zone is just treating the symptoms instead of the problem itself

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

There aren't 7 billion whales in the ocean.

There aren't 7 billion crew on those cargo ships, either.

But I think if you added up the ocean's animal life, you'd find that the produce as much or more crap as land-based life. Even then - well, we all know what the bear does in the woods. The buffalo does it on the plains, the lion and elephant do it in the jungle, worms do it underground, birds do it everywhere. Yet when we walk through these places, we don't have to wade through great piles of critter crap, do we?

[Frank Lee]

Originally Posted by Clev

Yeah, it's a bit of a misleading (and sensational) headline. Shipping vessels are fuel efficient for the load they carry. And since the EPA is creating a 'reduced emissions zone' around the US, where ships will need to clean themselves up to continue to deliver to the US, I fail to see the 'EPA hypocrisy.'

But hey, it got me to click on the thread, so I guess mission accomplished.

Just got off a tour boat ride at a working harbor; the guide said the big Great Lakes ships burn 45-60 gallons/mile, but are MUCH more efficient than trains or trucks... he said how much but I forgot. A 1,013 footer came in when we were out!

[Rokeby]

Countries have been taking steps to reduce pollution of all sorts from vessels
at sea for quite a few years now:

Marpol 73/78; is The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution
From Ships, 1973 as modified by the Protocol of 1978

"MARPOL 73/78 is one of the most important international marine
environmental conventions. It was designed to minimize pollution of the seas,
including dumping, oil and exhaust pollution. Its stated object is: to preserve
the marine environment through the complete elimination of pollution by oil
and other harmful substances and the minimization of accidental discharge of
such substances.

"The original MARPOL Convention was signed on 17 February 1973, but did
not come into force. The current Convention is a combination of 1973
Convention and the 1978 Protocol. It entered into force on 2 October 1983. As
of 31 December 2005, 136 countries, representing 98% of the world's
shipping tonnage, are parties to the Convention.

"All ships flagged under countries that are signatories to MARPOL are subject
to its requirements, regardless of where they sail, and member nations are
responsible for vessels registered under their respective nationalities."

MARPOL contains 6 annexes, concerned with preventing different forms of
marine pollution from ships:
Annex I - Oil
Annex II - Noxious Liquid Substances carried in Bulk
Annex III - Harmful Substances carried in Packaged Form
Annex IV - Sewage
Annex V - Garbage
Annex VI - Air Pollution

There are 161 countries party to the agreement as of 2005.
Only 136 are listed here:
Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Azerbaijan,
Austria, the Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belarus, Belgium, Belize,
Benin, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burma, Cambodia, Canada, Cape
Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba,
Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic,
Ecuador, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, The
Gambia, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana,
Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy,
Jamaica, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, North Korea, South Korea, Latvia,
Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta,
Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia,
Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua,
Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru,
Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint
Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, São Tomé and Príncipe,
Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore,
Slovakia, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka,
Suriname, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Togo, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago,
Tunisia, Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay,
Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam

[Clev]

Originally Posted by Laurentiu

Unfortunately air/water do not kindly comply to being "zoned". I would say creating a reduced emissions zone is just treating the symptoms instead of the problem itself

Not really. Many of the auto pollution controls are in use because they were mandated by CARB. California is a big enough market that it made sense to make cars that made less pollution, which brought down the cost of the pollution-control bits, which made them easier to mandate on a federal level, which then made them appear all over the country.

The US is still the largest consumer of the stuff that comes off those ships. If the ships are required to clean up their act to enter US waters, they still end up cleaner wherever they sail.

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by SentraSE-R

There aren't 7 billion whales in the ocean.

...no, it's 220 million whales, here in America (wink,wink)...see how sneakily I slipped in the obesity problem too?

[Laurentiu]

[Piwoslaw]

From Wikipedia:

Cunard state that their liner, the RMS Queen Elizabeth 2, travels 49.5 feet per imperial gallon of diesel oil (3.32 m/L or 41.2 ft/US gal), and that it has a passenger capacity of 1777. Thus carrying 1777 passengers we can calculate an efficiency of 16.7 passenger-miles per imperial gallon (16.9 L/100 p·km or 13.9 p·mpg–US).

OK, I know that you can't compare freight and passenger efficiency, but as for people moving: 16.9 L/100p·km is not much better than single occupancy commuting in a Hummer....

Re: dumping A whale turd is a part of nature, and animals never congregate in groups too large for nature to handle. It's a different story when people put hundreds or thousands of chicken, swine or cattle under one roof, or when a huge cruise ship pulls into an alaskan bay and each and every one of the 4000 passengers flush a few times a day.

[Laurentiu]

Originally Posted by Piwoslaw

From Wikipedia:



OK, I know that you can't compare freight and passenger efficiency, but as for people moving: 16.9 L/100p·km is not much better than single occupancy commuting in a Hummer....

Re: dumping A whale turd is a part of nature, and animals never congregate in groups too large for nature to handle. It's a different story when people put hundreds or thousands of chicken, swine or cattle under one roof, or when a huge cruise ship pulls into an alaskan bay and each and every one of the 4000 passengers flush a few times a day.

Interesting data...but for more honest comparison instead of a Hummer, let's say a 500 room Las Vegas hotel floating on the Atlantic carrying precious cargo of whales....(hey, I'm not talking about obese people....that's what they call high-rollers in Vegas.....Honest !!! )

[Piwoslaw]

Originally Posted by Laurentiu

let's say a 500 room Las Vegas hotel floating on the Atlantic carrying precious cargo of whales....

And would those whales be heading for Iceland or for Norway?